Semantic Web Interest Group IRC Chat Logs for 2003-12-19

00:14:37 <Arnia22> Arnia22 is now known as Arnia

00:40:41 <Davey> Davey is now known as D[a]vey

00:42:22 <_deusx> _deusx is now known as deusx

01:52:45 <D[a]vey> D[a]vey is now known as Davey

03:17:02 <Davey> Davey is now known as D[a]vey

03:33:51 <D[a]vey> D[a]vey is now known as Davey

05:01:24 <Davey> Davey is now known as D[a]vey

07:39:24 <ChanServ> [#rdfig] This channel is logged and blogged: http://logicerror.com/rdfIRCWelcome

10:59:56 <swh_home> swh_home is now known as swh

11:43:10 <deusx> deusx is now known as _deusx

14:24:04 <_deusx> _deusx is now known as deusx

14:57:18 <libby> .time

14:57:19 <datum> Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:57:18 GMT

15:00:09 <libby> .time

15:00:09 <datum> Fri, 19 Dec 2003 15:00:09 GMT

15:00:15 * libby waves

15:00:18 * Jhendler waves at libby

15:00:32 <libby> hm, Greg's not here yet

15:00:35 * bwm undulates on the waves

15:00:58 * Jhendler will be in and out - participate as best I can...

15:01:09 <libby> cheers jim

15:01:54 <GregElin> Morning!!

15:01:57 <libby> heya GregElin

15:02:08 <GregElin> Rather, Good (3pm) afternoon!

15:02:14 <libby> mng? swh? monica?

15:02:19 <libby> nmg rather

15:02:40 <nmg> hi libby

15:02:59 <swh> yes, im awake

15:03:06 <libby> hey nick. mc==monica?

15:03:11 <mc> yup

15:03:15 <libby> hia :)

15:03:19 <mc> howdie

15:03:24 * libby wonders if we are waiting for others

15:03:55 <libby> BLURB:meeting about WWW2004 image database

15:03:56 <dc_rdfig> A: meeting about WWW2004 image database from libby

15:04:06 <mc> is brian expected?

15:04:13 <libby> A:attending [libby miller|http://ilrt.org/people/libby]

15:04:14 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A1.

15:04:19 <GregElin> (Just looking over some notes...)

15:04:20 <libby> brian's here: bwm

15:04:32 * bwm- waves to monica

15:04:32 <GregElin> How do we do attending?

15:04:43 <libby> people fancy adding their names to that list as I have? goes to http://rdfig.xmlhack.com

15:05:00 <libby> (this is what we have done before at these sorts of irc meetings

15:05:02 <libby> )

15:05:03 <Jhendler> A: Jim Hendler for Univ of Md MIND Lab

15:05:03 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A2.

15:05:09 <GregElin> A:attending [Greg Elin|http://www.gregelin.com]

15:05:09 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A3.

15:05:13 <nmg> A: attending [Nick Gibbins|http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~nmg/]

15:05:13 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A4.

15:05:36 <bwm-> A: attending bwm (Brian McBride) http://www.topmeadow.net/bwm

15:05:36 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A5.

15:05:39 <libby> shall we think about a rough agenda or leave it completely freeform?

15:05:51 <mc> it seems that the mission critical thing

15:05:58 <mc> is the data collection

15:06:09 <mc> agreeing on the format for submissions, for instance

15:06:20 <mc> and what we want to focus on collecting??

15:06:22 <GregElin> Let's take two minutes and come up with an agenda.

15:06:25 <libby> i.e. the vocabs to use for the rdf?

15:06:26 * Jhendler - assume mc is monica?

15:06:31 <mc> does that seem reasonable?

15:06:37 <swh> A: attending swh [Steve Harris|http://inanna.ecs.soton.ac.uk/]

15:06:37 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A6.

15:06:45 <mc> hi Jim yes mc = monica mc schraefel

15:06:49 <GregElin> I think we have a couple of logistic/schedule things to touch upon, too.

15:07:12 <libby> ok, agnda sugestion from monica: data collection

15:07:36 * bwm- thinks that details of data collection a bit detailed before overall goals and structure worked out

15:07:42 <libby> any more? greg?

15:07:46 <GregElin> best guest of what we do in January; mailing list; wiki; volunteer to help with PR and content on public website.

15:08:10 <libby> sounds good greg

15:08:17 <GregElin> That's it for me: January, mailing list,wiki, voluteer.

15:08:32 <mc> we need volunteers for harvesting, no? steve?

15:08:41 <GregElin> Oops. that, too!

15:08:52 <mc> so also sources for pump priming

15:08:53 <libby> harvesting?

15:08:56 <libby> ok

15:09:16 <libby> ok if I use the rdfig.xmlhack.com for the agenda items?

15:09:17 <Jhendler> also need to at least briefly discuss license issues

15:09:25 <GregElin> Let's do this order: January, data description, volunteers needed, shape of mailing list and wiki?

15:09:32 <libby> darn, I forgot to email aaron

15:09:33 <swh> ok

15:09:44 <mc> liby, i don't know what the thing is you just sent the url for

15:09:55 <GregElin> That way, we can let our data-related decisions drive the other needs.

15:10:08 <libby> BLURB:agenda item: best guess of what we'll do in January

15:10:08 <dc_rdfig> B: agenda item: best guess of what we'll do in January from libby

15:10:32 <libby> BLURB: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: data description

15:10:32 <dc_rdfig> C: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: data description from libby

15:10:37 <GregElin> (agreed, Jim)

15:10:47 <libby> BLURB: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: volunteers required

15:10:48 <dc_rdfig> D: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: volunteers required from libby

15:10:57 <libby> BLURB: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: mailing list and wiki

15:10:57 <dc_rdfig> E: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: mailing list and wiki from libby

15:11:00 <libby> taht ok?

15:11:14 <Jhendler> licensing?

15:11:18 <libby> mc, it a robot that writes to a webpage for links, meetings agendas and actions etc

15:11:22 <libby> oh sorry

15:11:29 <libby> BLURB: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: licensing issues

15:11:29 <dc_rdfig> F: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: licensing issues from libby

15:11:44 <libby> GregElin: wann take it away on January?

15:12:08 <GregElin> Sure...just long enough to punt it back to you all.

15:12:31 <GregElin> yesterday it seemed the best time for spare cycles to get things going was early January.

15:12:51 <libby> hm, decide on vocabs to use/document how to use them if high on my list

15:12:55 <libby> is high

15:13:01 <mc> yup

15:13:08 <GregElin> It would be amazing if we could lock down the data spec monica described by the end of the first or second week of January.

15:13:19 <mc> that's feasible, me thinks

15:13:40 <mc> Greg, would that be a reasonable time to get prototyping some of the UI issues?

15:13:55 <mc> sorry - have we started with the agenda?

15:14:04 <GregElin> I think so. I can prototype of the photo side. Can you do that on the AKTive space side?

15:14:09 <libby> yep: we're ion things to do in Jan

15:14:32 <mc> ok, then should an outcome be a prototype form

15:14:33 <GregElin> Basically, I guess, get the key infrastructure decisions done by that time.

15:14:39 <iwaiAway> iwaiAway is now known as iwaim

15:14:41 <swh> GregElin: probably not - that will have to be done quite late

15:14:44 <mc> that users can use to enter the data we want to capture?

15:14:47 <GregElin> Right. Were you all thinking of hooking up in Bristol?

15:15:01 <mc> yes

15:15:03 <libby> could do...may not need to

15:15:04 <Jhendler> I'd like to step back a bit -- in particular, what about other technologies, approaches, etc?

15:15:05 <nmg> that's a likely plan

15:15:18 <mc> Jim, would you like the floor?

15:15:23 <libby> how d'you mean Jhendler ?

15:15:30 <Jhendler> I'd like to see us do something that doesn't create a site, but creates a repository

15:15:51 <mc> want to define the dif? site is the front end

15:15:59 <libby> Jhendler: we sorta talked about this yesterday - did you happen to see the notes from then?

15:16:14 <Jhendler> no, sorry

15:16:25 * libby find the link

15:16:29 * Jhendler is time sharing w/a phone call and this

15:16:48 <GregElin> I think the repository is the big goal. The "site" is really how we gather info into the repository, let people know what it is/how to use it.

15:17:03 <swh> agreed

15:17:09 <mc> agreed

15:17:10 <libby> see here Jhendler: http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2003-12-18.html#T12-47-32

15:17:16 <GregElin> Jim makes a good point. There is a *big* question about where the damn thing lives. On what computer.

15:17:20 <libby> greg++

15:17:38 <mc> we've been talking about mirrors, here.

15:17:42 <bwm> s/computer/computers/

15:17:43 <Jhendler> well, my question is this -- are we going to make the photos and metadata available and say "show us what you can do"

15:17:53 <Jhendler> or are we going to build something and say "look what we did"

15:17:58 <mc> both and

15:18:09 <GregElin> Maybe we define this spec stuff, then immediately make the decision on the right location to hold the authorative info?

15:18:09 <libby> we will need to have some intereface to it, but make the data avilable too

15:18:30 <Jhendler> so, what happens for other people with "competing" approaches

15:18:40 <libby> does anyone have a compuer could use?

15:18:49 <GregElin> yes, Jim...show us what you can do. And a simple something so people can use it, too, that we did.

15:18:50 <libby> in terms of what Jhendler ?

15:18:57 <Jhendler> it is possible that W3C could be approached

15:19:07 <libby> i.e. competing search? competing forms of annotation?

15:19:14 <libby> competing voccabs?

15:19:40 <mc> competition - such an ugly word. we're sharing resources, not competing for them!!

15:19:43 <Jhendler> all of the above

15:19:49 <swh> I would hope that were going to provide metadata ina known set of schema

15:19:54 <GregElin> Diplomacy point: The actual home of the authorative repository may be subject to discussion between us, IW3C2, W3C, etc.

15:19:56 <libby> Greg's plan I think was to make the images avilable under a suitable license, so anyone could annotate them, or reuse anoattion which had alreday been made

15:19:58 <swh> what other people do with it beyond then is up to them

15:19:58 <Jhendler> example --

15:20:00 <Jhendler>http://owl.mindswap.org/images/

15:20:00 <dc_rdfig> G: http://owl.mindswap.org/images/ from Jhendler

15:20:12 <Jhendler> G: Mindswap image demo

15:20:12 <dc_rdfig> Added comment G1.

15:20:13 <nmg> swh: to quote timbl, "it's the integration, stupid" ;)

15:20:45 <GregElin> not competiting, libby, just "alternative" -- R&D...

15:21:08 <Jhendler> that is the stuff my group did -- supposing we said "we want ours to be THE way" -- how would something like that be decided

15:21:10 <libby> GregElin/JHendler are you going to approach some people about computers?

15:21:30 <mc> just to get real about the time: i have to go at 4 (in 40mins) for another meet. anyone else?

15:21:57 <GregElin> Right, Libby. Our need *here* is to define the minimum metadata for the images and the minimum metadata for the conference stuff (papers, sessions, etc) so it works at a basic level and it is easy to take further.

15:22:41 <Jhendler> G:|Image demo at MINDSWAP

15:22:41 <dc_rdfig> Titled item G.

15:22:52 * bwm bwm suggests thats easy - the minimum metadata for an image is *none*

15:22:53 <libby> well Jhendler perhaps we could use some sort of consensus process :)

15:22:58 <Jhendler>http://www.mindswap.org/2003/PhotoStuff/

15:22:58 <dc_rdfig> H: http://www.mindswap.org/2003/PhotoStuff/ from Jhendler

15:23:04 <GregElin> Sure, Libby. I'll talk first with Ben, Mike, Stu, and see how to pursue. I'm not worry. We'll come up with a temporary home in Jan-Feb/March and then migrate to a permament home.

15:23:09 <Jhendler> H:| Photostuff

15:23:09 <dc_rdfig> Titled item H.

15:23:13 <libby> cheers Greg

15:23:18 <bwm> +1 to greg

15:23:27 <Jhendler> guess what I'm thinking is if we can do something supporting lots of people and approaches I would be happier

15:23:42 <libby> BLURB: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: where do we put it all?

15:23:42 <dc_rdfig> I: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: where do we put it all? from libby

15:23:47 <swh> Jhendler: i'd hope that is the intention

15:23:58 <GregElin> On the same page, Jim. Okay. Have we wrapped up schedule? Looks like we are already talking data!

15:23:59 <bwm> bwm would like someone to take the action of producing a high level description of what we are building.

15:24:08 <libby> I:GregElin>Sure, Libby. I'll talk first with Ben, Mike, Stu, and see how to pursue. I'm not worry. We'll come up with a temporary home in Jan-Feb/March and then migrate to a permament home.

15:24:09 <dc_rdfig> Added comment I1.

15:24:12 <Jhendler> me too, but it effects all the other agenda items, which is why I wanted to be sure we were in agreement

15:24:55 * danbri catches up

15:24:58 * bwm bwm suggests thats easy - the minimum metadata for an image is *none*

15:25:03 * libby agrees w bwm re the high level description

15:25:03 <danbri> +1

15:25:10 * danbri too

15:25:11 <swh> We have a machine that can be used for RDF storage, but its probably not good for interactive web stuff

15:25:32 <nmg> ie. fine for prototyping, not for production

15:25:45 <libby> I:<swh>We have a machine that can be used for RDF storage, but its probably not good for interactive web stuff

15:25:45 <dc_rdfig> Added comment I2.

15:25:47 <mc> i have the xserve we can use for the web interaction stuff, if there's a need

15:25:49 <nmg> (+1 to bwm, also)

15:25:56 <GregElin> Okay. I'm down with bwm's *none* suggestion. Shall we describe a minimum "recommendation" of data. It would be nice to know what YEAR/conference the photo was from. And who to contact about it.

15:25:57 <danbri> I would like to see an emphasis on distribution, with different sites/groups scooping up the data and showing its use in their various toolkits...

15:25:57 <libby> I:<mc>i have the xserve we can use for the web interaction stuff, if there's a need

15:25:57 <dc_rdfig> Added comment I3.

15:26:41 <GregElin> +1 danbri. And I'm in favor of Ben S's suggestion that we begin first with a small centralized version...then open it up.

15:26:46 <mc> Yes, danbri, and we're one of the groups scooping up the data and doing something with it...

15:26:55 <mc> what greg said

15:26:56 <danbri> BTW would be happy to see this stuff as a driver for adding extensions to FOAF if needed...

15:27:10 <GregElin> (this is going to be a terrific undertaking...)

15:27:15 <libby> C:<GregElin>: It would be nice to know what YEAR/conference the photo was from. And who to contact about it.

15:27:16 <dc_rdfig> Added comment C1.

15:27:24 <danbri> yup...

15:27:27 <bwm> I support greg's notion that we should have some identified vocabularies for metadata. Propose call for volunteers to make a proposal and circulate rather than doing online now.

15:27:39 <Jhendler> re: high level discussion - what about an OWL description (or at least RDFS)

15:27:41 <nmg> in what timescale?

15:27:49 <libby> GregElin: as per bwm's suggestion, how about you come up with a high-level description of the project?

15:28:12 <libby> (since you've alreday doen alot of this for proposal etc)

15:28:14 <Jhendler> +1 to libby's suggestion - a high-level descrtiption would really help

15:28:17 <nmg> I'm willing to work on the metadata vocab

15:28:19 <GregElin> Okay. I'll take first crack, pulling from the document I circulated. (I'd like to move that online asap, too)

15:28:31 * bwm high level description is of system, not project.

15:28:43 <libby> BLURB: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: high level description

15:28:43 <dc_rdfig> J: WWW2004 image db meet agenda item: high level description from libby

15:28:52 <GregElin> Question on the "metadata" vocab...

15:28:56 <libby> jql: of system not project

15:29:01 <Jhendler> I'd like to have us think about hosting a repository of tools and the like -- making it so people can play with DIFFERENT ways to mark up images

15:29:03 <libby> J:of system not project

15:29:03 <dc_rdfig> Added comment J1.

15:29:16 * libby misunderstood bwm

15:29:19 <nmg> Jhendler: I agree

15:29:27 <libby> J:Greg to have a bash at this

15:29:27 <dc_rdfig> Added comment J2.

15:29:36 <bwm> to greg: if you want any help with that description

15:29:38 <nmg> although perhaps hosting is too strong

15:29:39 <Jhendler> if we're going to have one ontology, one underlying infrastructure, one anything, then I wish you well, but I won't be motivated to play and will probably have to question why it is being done

15:29:45 <GregElin> I've been *really* focused on photos. Do we need to distinguish between metadata vocab for photos and metadata vocab for conference stuff? Is it all one vocab? Help me, oh, semantic web experts...

15:29:46 <danbri> (aside) fyi bwm, this channel's logger logs IRC /me emotes (unlike Ralph's logger at W3C)

15:29:59 <bwm> thanks danbri

15:29:59 <Jhendler> the maturity of SW is not where we should be forcing single approaches

15:30:15 <danbri> +10 re jhendler on one/one/one; plurality is the point...

15:30:17 <libby> Jhendler: I don;t think we are proposing using one vocab or one tool

15:30:21 <bwm> bwm -> jh: this is not a research project

15:30:27 <GregElin> Oops...I'm lost...

15:30:32 <danbri> <GregElin> I've been *really* focused on photos. Do we need to distinguish between metadata vocab for photos and metadata vocab for conference stuff? Is it all one vocab? Help me, oh, semantic web experts...

15:30:52 <danbri> The thing about photo metadata is that it is rarely about photos; its about the things in the photos very often...

15:30:58 <Jhendler> Greg, a metadata vocab for photos would be a useful contribution to many projects

15:31:01 <bwm> Who has experience of photo metadata?

15:31:06 * danbri does

15:31:06 <libby> in particular, I'm interested in documenting some good approaches to doing photos annottio, with various vocabs

15:31:07 <Jhendler> A conference one might want to be more open

15:31:10 * libby does

15:31:11 <GregElin> two discussions, having we are: (1) metadata and (2) high level description of project v. system.

15:31:14 * Jhendler does

15:31:19 * nmg does

15:31:23 <bwm> I propose danbri/libby circulate proposal for metadata schema for photos

15:31:40 * danbri proposes libby/danbri circulate ... ie. libby owns task...

15:31:42 <danbri> lib?

15:31:53 <mc> i'd like to suggest that steve and nick be involved in developing this schema

15:31:53 <libby> that's fine

15:32:02 <GregElin> yes, Dan, Libby - why don't you take the lead (but please keep me tightly involved in that as that is my interest, too).

15:32:03 <bwm> sorry: didn't mean to cut other folks out - feel free to shout I want to help

15:32:03 <Jhendler> I agree, but hope it also has something for relating subregions to images -- see out photo demo for example

15:32:06 * danbri happy to work with steve/nick

15:32:12 <danbri> and greg et al :)

15:32:20 * libby reiterates not intrested in a single schema, just various means of combining some interesting vocabs

15:32:24 <danbri> just a first pass for discussion...

15:32:28 <GregElin> mc, this schema? meaning photo metadata schema?

15:32:40 <mc> ya.

15:32:49 <Jhendler> bwm - not sure I agree w/you about "it's not research" -- the current tools that are out there are insufficient comapred to what RDF/RDFS/OWL new recs allow, and I'd sure hope we end up showing this latter stuff off

15:32:49 <bwm> bwm was then going to suggest same thing for conference metadata - who wants to volunteer.

15:32:52 <danbri> not a schema, an account of the data we'd want. it may not need a new schema at all.

15:32:59 <libby> danbri++

15:33:05 <swh> yes

15:33:08 <nmg> ditto

15:33:13 <GregElin> danbri++

15:33:16 <mc> sure

15:33:20 <danbri> think of it more like a document format which draws largely (maybe entirely) upon exising rdf/xml/owl vocabularies

15:33:23 <bwm> +1 to danbri - bwm is typing faster than he can think

15:33:27 <Jhendler> I would volunteer MindLab to do an OWL ontology for conf metadata

15:33:27 <mc> yes

15:33:45 <mc> JH that would be great

15:33:52 <danbri> dublin core, rss, foaf, wordnet ... get us a pretty long way. figuring out what's needed on top of that is the interesting task

15:33:55 <mc> is there a resource for that data for all conferences?

15:33:57 <GregElin> How's about libby/dan focus on photos, nick/steve focus first on conference, then two groups pass to each other?

15:34:02 <bwm> anyone want to work with jh on conf metadata?

15:34:14 <libby> C:libby/danbri/nick/steve to work on an account of the data we'd want. it may not need a new schema at all.

15:34:15 <dc_rdfig> Added comment C2.

15:34:20 <nmg> GregElin: sounds good to us - we've got a fair bit we can reuse from the CAS work

15:34:20 <GregElin> Great, Jhendler!

15:34:25 * bwm notes greg spot divide and conquer strategy

15:34:51 <libby> C:jim/nick/steve focus first on conference data would need

15:34:51 <dc_rdfig> Added comment C3.

15:34:53 * Jhendler phht on wordnet - if we want simple keyword type stuff we don't need SW - let's move to something more expressive in managing this stuff - but then, that's what timbl and I have been saying for a long time

15:35:04 <nmg> agreed, Jhendler

15:35:14 <danbri> wordnet is better than simple keywords, jim.

15:35:26 <Jhendler> minimally - but we can take that up another time

15:35:35 <GregElin> Sounds great!

15:35:40 <nmg> danbri: there's a largely philosophical debate I'd rather not get into there...

15:35:43 <danbri> it is a somewhat idiosyncratic system, viewed as a formal ontology... but is isn't just keywords...

15:36:02 <libby> maybe we can move to next item? volunteers?

15:36:17 <mc> wasn't there some issue around wordnet - as in not wanting to use?

15:36:21 <Jhendler> C: What I will do is cull from a few ontologies and try to put together a fairly generic event ontology with some richness in the conference field

15:36:22 <dc_rdfig> Added comment C4.

15:36:42 <Jhendler> C: then anyone who wants to link/extend can do so -- that's what RDF/OWL is all about

15:36:42 <dc_rdfig> Added comment C5.

15:37:09 <nmg> c: likewise from Soton, then compare/merge for a 'best of breed'

15:37:19 <libby> cap 'C' nick

15:37:21 <nmg> C: likewise from Soton, then compare/merge for a 'best of breed'

15:37:22 <dc_rdfig> Added comment C6.

15:37:36 <nmg> (rassenfrassencasesensitivity)

15:37:41 <Jhendler> nmg - makes sense to me

15:38:06 <GregElin> Volunteers. Okay. We are doing some interesting. We need a keeper of the story.

15:38:29 <bwm> so we have a plan for getting image and conf 'ontologies' - do we want to set a target date for first cut?

15:38:32 <GregElin> (A blogger?)

15:39:17 <mmealling> hmmm.... If I were going to do a SW-geek tshirt, what would I put on it......

15:39:22 <Jhendler> btw, are we going to include video, or just still images?

15:39:30 <nmg> mmealling: brains...

15:39:39 <libby> brrraaains!

15:39:47 <GregElin> bwm, we need by 2nd week in january enough info on that stuff so we can be public enough to get people involved.

15:39:51 <danbri> re blob... we could create a blog and give folk accounts (there's a Movable Type installation already for swad-europe)...

15:39:54 <Jhendler> i.e. http://swint.mindswap.org/rdf/instance/?inst=%7B%27link%27%3A+%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.myjumpstation.com%2Fmemorial%2FWorld%2520trade%2520centre%2FWorld%2520Trade%2520Centre%2520-%2520Plane%2520Crash%25202%2520%2528View%25202%2529.MPG%27%7D is a marked up video

15:39:58 <danbri> s/blob/blog/ :)

15:40:09 <libby> cool Jhendler

15:40:16 <Jhendler> but not from conferences domain of course

15:40:18 <libby> might be useful danbri

15:40:31 <bwm> greg: is there an overall timeline somewhere?

15:40:46 <GregElin> Executive decision: just photos through 2004 conference.

15:40:52 <mc> Greg, what are you looking for when you say 'get people involved'?

15:41:16 <bwm> bwm supports greg's executive decision

15:41:18 <Jhendler> timeline: my students who do most of our photo work are on break till early Jan (burned out by finals) so mid-Jan would make me happier

15:41:28 <GregElin> After conference, we can tackle video formally. Until then, anyone who wants to pursue video in parallel is encouraged to do so, but video won't be part of initial core through May 2004.

15:42:04 <Jhendler> ok, works for me

15:42:10 <danbri> yup

15:42:19 <GregElin> bwm -- there is/was an estimate timeline in the word document (I'll go get it) but it needs revision, obviously.

15:42:26 <libby> C:<GregElin>Executive decision: just photos through 2004 conference. After conference, we can tackle video formally. Until then, anyone who wants to pursue video in parallel is encouraged to do so, but video won't be part of initial core through May 2004.

15:42:27 <dc_rdfig> Added comment C7.

15:42:29 <GregElin> (hold on)

15:42:58 * bwm suggests greg put current plan on wiki where it can be modified updated etc

15:43:19 <danbri> +1

15:43:36 <libby> +1 is it worth making a new wiki page for this project?

15:43:49 <bwm> bwm suggests there be an action list on wiki

15:43:52 <danbri> make sure we have copies of anything authoritative in our inboxes though, deadline-changes etc

15:44:04 <nmg> agreed

15:44:15 <bwm> +1 to danbri - wiki plan is for ref

15:44:23 <nmg> wiki for the permanent record (for suitable values of permanent)

15:44:24 <danbri> linked from ImageDescription please (IslandTopics upset DanC, for good reason...)

15:44:29 <libby> okey, I can transcibe the actions here into the wiki

15:44:41 <GregElin> I thought we had a wiki page...WWW2004?

15:44:43 <danbri> wiki keeps a history

15:44:47 * danbri thought there was one yeah

15:45:17 <danbri> there is http://esw.w3.org/topic/WWW2004 yet, seems general to entire conference though, or could be

15:45:21 <libby> that's rather generic greg - might want to put other stuff related to the conf on it?

15:45:27 <GregElin> Here's the first timeline I estimated late Nov/early Dec. We are moving forward, but missed some formal dates.

15:45:28 <GregElin> ASAP Identify working group, finalize proposal

15:45:28 <GregElin> December 10 Public request for photos from past conferences

15:45:28 <GregElin> January 15 (Public) Deadline for submitting photos from past conferences

15:45:28 <GregElin> February 5 Open photo history for pre-conference annotation

15:45:28 <GregElin> March 1 All hardware/software donations arranged

15:45:30 <GregElin> March 18 (Public) Deadline for pre-conference annotations

15:45:32 <GregElin> April 19 Event staffing determined

15:45:34 <GregElin> May 17-22 WWW2004 Conference in NYCJune 7(Public) Deadline for WWW2004 conference photos

15:46:14 <GregElin> I think if public request moves to january, no big deal. I think we've traded the public request for building organization and momentum among ourselves.

15:46:18 <libby> B:timeline going on wiki, also actions

15:46:19 <dc_rdfig> Added comment B1.

15:46:23 <bwm> thanks greg - I think we've slipped a month

15:46:29 <libby> already :)

15:46:49 <GregElin> yes, bwm, but we've also picked up momentum and organization. hey...it was an optimistic draft.

15:46:58 <bwm> greg: +1

15:47:00 <mc> i think the ui stuff has to be done in parallel with the data description path

15:47:16 <GregElin> Having been missing dates b/c more people keep getting involved and bringing good news and energy!

15:47:20 <libby> so, volunteers?

15:47:30 * libby likes danbri's blog idea, many documenters

15:47:33 <danbri> volunteers for what, exactly?

15:47:43 <danbri> for writing up story...?

15:47:46 <GregElin> let's list volunteers needed:

15:47:52 <mc> it's ten minutes to the hour. is there anything that's more important than volunteers on the agenda?

15:48:01 * Jhendler notes that we also have spent some of this time for getting Stu Feldman and others on board

15:48:24 <GregElin> We can all contribute to story, but it would be nice to have an informal owner. Especially as we approach spring.

15:48:33 * libby wonders about the mailing list....

15:48:52 <Jhendler> mailing list w/archive and signup would be real nice...

15:49:02 <dajobe> dunno if this is volunteering; I'll help out with blog chores/admin if you like. Also want to think about linking to other www2004 things such as IRC, community sites.

15:49:02 <GregElin> yep...mailing list, wiki, license...

15:49:15 <libby> what do you reckon to public-esw@w3.org jhendler?

15:49:28 <danbri> re mail discussions - I would like it to be long-term archived, happy to see public-esw@w3.org used for this.

15:49:30 <GregElin> That's helpful dajobe, even if not volunteering ;-)

15:49:33 <libby> (it's just sat there really, not much used

15:49:35 <libby> )

15:49:40 <bwm> dajobe: could we think about using the swad-e semantic blogging tool?

15:49:43 * danbri notes mc's concern re email address exposure / spam

15:49:53 <GregElin> monica, are you okay with public provided we get you a different email address?

15:49:55 <Jhendler> libby, is public-esw only for this project ?

15:49:57 <danbri> ...suggest hotmail/yahoo/etc freebie accounts, or spamassassin...

15:50:02 <mc> sure

15:50:07 <GregElin> We need a mailing list ONLY for this project.

15:50:13 <Jhendler> something like public-esw-photos or such

15:50:20 <libby> no it's used by swad-e. but not much.

15:50:23 <danbri> public-esw is the swad-europe list; if we need a general one, could do that...

15:50:30 <nmg> danbri: we (soton) already run spamassassin locally

15:50:32 <GregElin> swad-e?

15:50:39 <danbri> we don't have a huge amount of traffic. I could look into a new list for it at w3c.

15:51:02 <libby> swad-europe, european-funded sweb project that dan and dajobe and I areworking on

15:51:11 <GregElin> sweb?

15:51:19 <GregElin> oh...never mind. duh.

15:51:23 <Jhendler> with due respect, I'd like this not to appear as a SWAD-E project -- swad e helping to run it is fine - but let's keep funding sources and technology separate

15:51:25 <libby> sorry

15:51:44 <libby> F:danbri to investgate new mailing list/use of public-esw

15:51:45 <dc_rdfig> Added comment F1.

15:51:47 <GregElin> +1 jh

15:51:52 <bryce> re: spam... http://dodgeit.com/ (throw away email addresses, rss of messages)

15:51:59 <Jhendler> so swad-e hosting a site works for me, swad-e being the site doesn't work for me

15:52:18 <libby> noone was suggesting either

15:52:22 <dajobe> we don't have any servers, jim

15:52:25 <danbri> jim, sure. it wouldn't appear a swad-e project any more than having IRC logged here makes us look like an XMLHack project, I hope.

15:52:25 <libby> just a handy list

15:52:37 <danbri> mail list + archives, that's all

15:52:42 <libby> perhaps a new one would be simpler

15:52:48 <libby> if that's possible

15:52:57 <Jhendler> danbri - let me be clear - I would not want www-esw to be the mailing list for this project if you want me to be involved.

15:52:58 <GregElin> Need a mailing list this week, before xmas.

15:53:04 <swh> i'm sure we could register a .org and host it

15:53:08 * libby thinks might as well continue uising the esw wiki though - that's not swad-e

15:53:12 <Jhendler> however - www-esw-photo would be fine

15:53:13 * eikeon waves... scrolls back... catches up with conversation

15:53:20 <libby> heya eikeon

15:53:28 <danbri> s/www/public/ (list naming policy)

15:53:34 <Jhendler> because our aim is WWW which is international...

15:53:38 <GregElin> swh, before we do that, there is some diplomacy discussions with w3c, iw3c2, etc. domain will be discussed on mailing lits.

15:53:44 <GregElin> s/lits/list

15:53:59 <danbri> ok I'll take a listrequest to w3c as and when folks here decide that'd be useful

15:54:16 <GregElin> Let us know right away, please, danbri.

15:54:27 <Jhendler> however, would be nice for now to have some list of the people involved as there seem to be several different email threads with different people on them

15:54:31 <danbri> Well, I'm all set to go off and do it, just ask me to!

15:54:34 <libby> I think we all think useful danbri

15:54:34 <GregElin> (I can always start a temporary email list on my server)

15:54:34 <swh> i would prefer it to be a w3c list - one less server to worry about

15:54:39 <libby> poease do danbri

15:54:43 <GregElin> (archiving will be week)

15:55:03 <GregElin> +1 swh, I think w3c is a great place for mailing list.

15:55:06 <danbri> as interim, copying www-archive@w3.org is a way to surface stuff easily (www-archive is archived at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/ already).

15:55:11 * libby wonders if that counts as asking danbri

15:55:11 <GregElin> Okay...wiki concerns?

15:55:21 <Jhendler> w3c would be my pref as well, and since they work closely w/iw3c2 it's probably also politically correct

15:55:29 <danbri> OK. I plan to go away and ask for a w3c list for this. Any objections?

15:55:33 * danbri counts to five

15:55:48 <bwm> +1 to danbri requesting w3c list

15:55:50 <libby> :)

15:55:51 <swh> +1

15:55:52 <libby> +1

15:55:56 <Jhendler> wiki okay w/me for now - since it is "scratch pad" it doesn't carry the association that an archived mailing list does

15:55:57 <nmg> +1

15:55:57 <Jhendler> +1

15:56:08 <mc> what is this "+1"?

15:56:11 <danbri> action: danbri to request w3c list / archive for this project

15:56:21 <danbri> +1 shorthand for 'same again from me'

15:56:22 <Jhendler> mc - this is an irc convention for "I agree"

15:56:23 <deltab> mc: positive vote

15:56:39 <danbri> libby, could you record the action appropriately?

15:56:40 <mc> thanks!

15:56:43 * Jhendler notes the semantic drift in those answers :->

15:56:46 <libby> yep

15:57:03 <libby> F1:<danbri>action: danbri to request w3c list / archive for this project

15:57:03 <dc_rdfig> Replaced comment F1.

15:57:18 <libby> darn

15:57:24 <libby> E:<danbri>action: danbri to request w3c list / archive for this project

15:57:24 <dajobe> 3 minutes to go

15:57:24 <dc_rdfig> Added comment E1.

15:57:33 <libby> licensing?

15:57:40 <libby> F1:=""

15:57:41 <dc_rdfig> Replaced comment F1.

15:57:51 <bwm> dajobe: do you have an action to set up a blog?

15:57:52 <nmg> licensing for the images and licvensing for the data are separate issue

15:57:54 <GregElin> Libby...are you going to contact aaron re license? (BTW...I might have some developments on that end here, too...)

15:57:58 <libby> Jhendler: what were your concerns?

15:58:05 <libby> yep, sorry, will do today

15:58:06 <swh> ...and licencing for the software

15:58:12 <dajobe> bwm: I'm happy to set up a blog if that's what people wnat

15:58:13 <Jhendler> eric miller was very concerned about the licensing issues - he says if we create the repository without getting the copyright stuff right we reun the risk of disaster

15:58:21 <Jhendler> says we need to get that figured out up front.

15:58:28 <swh> agreed

15:58:32 <danbri> yes agree

15:58:32 <nmg> it's a reasonable concern, Jhendler

15:58:34 <libby> F:action libby ask aaron swartz about advice on a CC license

15:58:34 <dc_rdfig> Added comment F2.

15:58:45 <Jhendler> ditto for the software stuff if we do anything other than use something people already have in open source with their own licenses

15:58:50 <swh> the us photo copyright issues really muddy the waters

15:58:58 <dajobe> & CC is US law

15:59:06 <GregElin> I think as a general rule software is not licensed as part of this project. The contributor's software is either open source or not.

15:59:07 <libby> swh, in what sense?

15:59:09 <Jhendler> i.e. big difference between "put it here" and "link to it" in the software open-source world

15:59:15 <danbri> re blog, dajobe you've admin access to esw.w3.org weblog installation? might need filetree fiddling (new directory, permissions) which bit I could do...

15:59:24 <dajobe> danbri: that's what I was thinking of

15:59:26 <nmg> I think that swh is referring to a person's ownership of their image

15:59:30 * bwm wonders if anyone willing to accept action to develop schema directed web metadata input application

15:59:31 <swh> yes

15:59:32 <nmg> can't remember the exact term...

15:59:50 <GregElin> There will be a license for contributed photos. If you put your photos in the CORE, your grant that usage license to your photos.

15:59:57 <Jhendler> greg - I agree, think the sofwtare issues can be gotten around - but the copyright important

16:00:01 <libby> also: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/34231.html

16:00:14 <libby> - essential we can remove photos easily if people complain

16:00:19 <Jhendler> greg - yes - it is getting that license right that wm is concerned with

16:00:20 <eaon|ill> eaon|ill is now known as eaon

16:00:26 * danbri a bit scared of schema-based forms, generally finds hardcoding not so bad...

16:00:30 <danbri> (is that heresy around here? ;)

16:00:39 <GregElin> In addition to this royalty-free CORE, people can link their collections (distributed!) to the collection and state their own license...and that's part of what the sweb is for, right?

16:00:39 <swh> ...likeness rights

16:00:42 <mc> must depart...will check the log

16:00:46 * libby would like to do schema-driven but suspects v hard

16:00:47 <Jhendler> bwm - I will take on that action - hey, done already :-> but again, I don't think we want any one tool for this

16:00:49 * bwm bows to danbri's experience

16:00:58 <nmg> danbri: somewhere in the continuum between commonsense and heresy...

16:01:00 <libby> which action Jhendler ?

16:01:02 <danbri> they're the holy grail ;)

16:01:11 <GregElin> libby and greg will follow up with creative commons on license?

16:01:18 <libby> okey

16:01:30 <Jhendler> bwm's request for someone to do "schema directed web metadata input application"

16:01:33 <bwm> bwm proposes actin jimh to make metadata input tool available for evaluation

16:01:42 <libby> F:<GregElin>libby and greg will follow up with creative commons on license

16:01:43 <dc_rdfig> Added comment F3.

16:01:54 * bwm bwm pleased to see licensing issue has owners

16:01:58 <Jhendler> the version we have now is primitive, only shows the idea - next version due mid-Jan will be better

16:02:00 * libby wonders how would work with multiple vocabns used together

16:02:00 <GregElin> let's wrap up with a critical issue...

16:02:13 <Jhendler> but bwm - what we do have now is available and I chumped it earlier today

16:02:17 <bwm> greg: +1

16:02:20 <danbri> so there's licensing terms for the image by its owner, ditto for metadata (possibly same/different party); and also privacy etc issues re the person(s) depicted in image?

16:02:30 <GregElin> Is everyone going to have a nice holiday? Are we going to try another chat between now and the new year?

16:02:36 <libby> yeah danbri

16:02:50 <GregElin> (right danbri...all that stuff to figure out)

16:03:03 <Jhendler> H: available for evaluation. but an early release

16:03:04 <dc_rdfig> Added comment H1.

16:03:08 <danbri> its the last bit (rights of persons in image, given international aspect) that worries me...

16:03:18 <libby> F:<danbri>so there's licensing terms for the image by its owner, ditto for metadata (possibly same/different party); and also privacy etc issues re the person(s) depicted in image?

16:03:18 <dc_rdfig> Added comment F4.

16:03:19 <GregElin> what do we need to do between now and Jan 5 to make sure that week of Jan 5 is used as we hope?

16:03:30 <libby> I think we have to be prepoarted to take things down on demand

16:03:33 <Jhendler> libby, our tool is inherently multi-ontology -- any tool built to a single schema will fail on the SW IMHO

16:03:39 <GregElin> probably, libby.

16:03:51 <GregElin> +1 Jhendler

16:04:10 <Jhendler> Greg - I think by Jan 5 we need clear goal statements from you; and then we can review status of action items

16:04:19 <GregElin> It's the hour...I can stay...but its late afternoon for all of you...

16:04:31 <Jhendler> I gotta go soon

16:04:35 * libby can stay

16:04:53 * bwm can stay if it means we can give jimh actions in his absence

16:04:57 <Jhendler> btw, our stuff does the markup, but not much on backend and querying - would love to see mc take a shot at discussing this

16:05:05 <libby> did we arrange next meet?

16:05:19 <GregElin> I guess Jan 5 definately.

16:05:25 <libby> ok, thanks

16:05:29 <nmg> 3pm again?

16:05:54 <GregElin> Maybe jan 2 or 3?

16:06:16 <bwm> How about Monday between Xmas and new year?

16:06:17 <nmg> jan 2,3 are out for me

16:06:25 <swh> me too

16:06:26 <Jhendler> I could probably do same time on Jan 5 -- can't do Saturdays

16:06:31 <libby> I can;t do taht mon bwm

16:06:58 <dajobe> sounds like the 5th

16:07:02 <nmg> 29th is also out for me

16:07:04 <bwm> looks like any meet before 05 Jan will be adhoc

16:07:10 <Jhendler> that Mon not great for me - but also too soon w/respect to having much done

16:07:22 <GregElin> How's about tue 27 or wed 28 for a check in?

16:07:26 <Jhendler> by Jan 5 I hope we can have a draft of an event ontology

16:07:54 <Jhendler> I won't have irc 27/28, but will have email

16:08:13 <nmg> that's 27/28 january, GregElin ?

16:08:32 * eikeon has an aging web based schema driven editor

16:08:38 <GregElin> Dec 27/28, 2003

16:08:59 <nmg> that's sat/sun, not tue/wed

16:09:46 <GregElin> My bad. Okay, how about informal on Dec 30?

16:09:59 * libby could do that

16:10:00 <GregElin> Or just forget...we'll do email. :-)

16:10:11 <libby> what about 6th jan?

16:10:26 <GregElin> Let's enjoy the end of the year. Let's do something on Jan 6.

16:10:26 * libby thinks schedulign by email even worse...

16:10:47 <libby> pencil it in? subject to confiirmation?

16:11:04 <GregElin> And everyone tries to keep first week in January available to make good headway on tasks?

16:11:26 <GregElin> Jan 6, penciled in, subject to confirmation (via our new email list).

16:11:31 <nmg> first full week, yes

16:11:37 <GregElin> morning in America, afternoon in Europe

16:11:43 <libby> A:possible next meet, [http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=6&month=1&year=2004&hour=15&min=0&sec=0&p1=0|2004-01-06, 15:00 GMT]

16:11:43 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A7.

16:11:53 <libby> cheer greg

16:11:56 <libby> cheers

16:12:20 <GregElin> cheers!

16:12:27 <GregElin> and THANKS all

16:12:29 <libby> F1=""

16:12:37 <libby> F1:""

16:12:37 <dc_rdfig> Deleted comment F1.

16:12:55 <danbri> yep, thanks!

16:14:05 <libby> D:<dajobe> dunno if this is volunteering; I'll help out with blog chores/admin if you like. Also want to think about linking to other www2004 things such as IRC, community sites.

16:14:06 <dc_rdfig> Added comment D1.

16:14:39 <dajobe> I'm currently thinking hosting a movable type one here; I'd prefer to be able to kick the server myself if necessary

16:16:17 <libby> A:see [http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2003-12-19.html#T15-00-15|discussion]

16:16:18 <dc_rdfig> Added comment A8.

16:16:29 <GregElin> Works for me dajobe. I think big goal of keeping the story is describing how different systems work, etc., so a paper can be written later.

16:16:39 * bwm suggests swad-e semantic blog might be worth thinking about

16:16:39 <dajobe> heh, libby there's the new fangled "logger, chump A" :)

16:16:47 <libby> ah yes

16:17:00 <libby> shouela done that at start tho

16:17:18 <golbeck_> golbeck_ is now known as golbeck

16:17:31 <bryce> question: is the www2004 conf accepting registrations?

16:17:31 <libby> heya ndw

16:17:40 * bwm cant remember the command for opening a new messaging window with someone

16:17:53 <dajobe> all praise ndw and his image metadata at http://norman.walsh.name/2003/12/15/shattered

16:17:59 <GregElin> URL is http://www.www2004.org Don't know where registration stands.

16:18:40 <libby> can;t see any bryce

16:18:46 <libby> /msg brian

16:19:01 <ndw> hi libby

16:19:08 <ndw> lol

16:19:28 <swh> swh is now known as swh_afk

16:19:31 <ndw> There's something about shattered that you particularly like, dajobe?

16:19:49 <bryce> ok, thanks.

16:20:09 <bwm> ndw: did you consider calling it self portrait?

16:20:10 <dajobe> we were just talking about www2004 image capture & metadata, terminology

16:20:17 <bryce> um... how to msg brian?

16:20:43 <ndw> bwm, no, but I did put it in the selfportraits topic, I think.

16:20:50 <GregElin> "/msg bwm your message here"

16:20:51 <ndw> I submitted it to themirrorproject as well :-)

16:20:52 <bwm> ndw: didn't mean to be rude - I was just looking in the reflections

16:21:09 <ndw> gracious! i didn't think you said anything rude!

16:21:31 * ndw is on lots of committees. has very thick skin :-)

16:22:11 * bwm bwm is sometimes rude when he doesn't mean to be, so sometimes appologies when he doesn't need to.

16:22:18 <ndw> heh

16:22:19 <GregElin> Libby, Brian, Dan...I'm going to wish you a wonderful holidays. Time to start day out here. Final day in california before I fly back to east coast.

16:22:21 <ndw> no worries

16:22:53 <GregElin> Thank you for getting on board. There's wonderful momentum building for this project.

16:23:03 <bwm> greg: have a good day, and a good holiday. see you next year.

16:23:53 <GregElin> And I'm having some interesting discussions towards making Fotonotes a simple open standard for image description stuff -- i'm eager to include the more formal codepiction rdf you all are doing.

16:24:05 <GregElin> and go open source!

16:24:18 <GregElin> see you next year, Brian!

16:24:48 <GregElin> So later all! Best Holiday Wishes!

16:26:04 <kota> wow,,, seems having had a great meeting...

16:37:21 <dajobe> later... seems can't use movable type - personal license forbids "hosting, or offering to host, the Software, on any basis"

16:38:45 <bryce> dajobe... that doesn't sound right.

16:39:09 <dajobe> I quoted from the personal license text.

16:39:18 <dajobe> otherwise $150 for the commercial license

16:39:56 <danbri> Dean looked into situation for W3C running an installation; it's OK.

16:40:04 <bryce> but thousands of people use MT. are they all in violation?

16:40:12 <dajobe> they use it personally

16:40:14 * danbri also looked into paying, which we could've done.

16:40:32 <danbri> It's fine, trust me.

16:40:54 <dajobe> "You may install the Software on a single website, residing on a single server for your personal, non-commercial use only. Enjoy!"

16:40:55 <danbri> If we opened up the installation and said "hey, get your free weblog account here" to the world, that'd be a different matter

16:42:13 <danbri> Ben said, "The non-commercial license covers both personal and non-profit use, so you're covered by the standard license."

16:42:43 <dajobe> so "personal, non-commercial" where , means OR not AND

16:43:33 <danbri> wording might be made clearer... but basically Dean asked about our using it as a not-for-profit org, and was OK...

16:43:39 <mmealling> would anyone be remotely interested in this: http://www.cafeshops.com/rocketforge.9047840?zoom=yes or am I just being a little to geeky?

16:43:51 <dajobe> ok, ilrt's not for profit, so I can go with that

16:44:04 <dajobe> s/ilrt/UoB/

16:44:57 * ndw chuckles at the sweatshirt

16:45:07 <dajobe> gosh, that's a hardcore rdf[/xml] t-shirt

16:45:35 <bryce> that's pretty geeky. is the shirt eXtensible?

16:45:43 <dajobe> my repost http://journal.dajobe.org/journal/2003/12/tapestry/semweb.jpg

16:45:49 <dajobe> reposte (sp?)

16:46:24 <bryce> dajobe: nice threads.

16:46:38 <mmealling> bryce, possibly. I bet a good laundry marking pen would let you extend that out further. ;-)

16:46:43 <dajobe> for more info http://journal.dajobe.org/journal/archives/2003_12.html#001619

16:46:47 <bryce> he he

16:47:15 <mmealling> yea, its geeky, but would anyone actually buy one?

16:47:30 <deltab> riposte

16:47:54 <bryce> might be tough to validate online, though. maybe through OCR.

16:48:21 <dajobe> of course rdf:RDF is now optional :)

16:48:33 <dajobe> s/now/again/

16:48:39 <kota> optional?

16:48:44 <kota> means can be omitted?

16:48:46 <bryce> so is rdf in general.

16:48:50 <dajobe> yeah

16:50:00 <dajobe> "When there is only one top-level node element inside rdf:RDF, the rdf:RDF can be omitted" http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-rdf-syntax-grammar-20031215/#section-Syntax-complete-document

16:50:17 <mmealling> that was the easiest one to come up with. I'll try something more interesting latter....

16:50:44 <kota> hmm, seems nice.

16:50:57 <libby> ndw, I put your lovely bable photo in my codepiction thing, hope you don;t mind

16:51:04 <libby> bauble

16:51:16 <dajobe> reminds me of namespace pic http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/13/XMLporn.png

16:51:23 <dajobe> ... that tim bray took during ndw's xml 2003 talk

16:51:32 <dajobe> see http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/13/MegaXML

16:51:48 <bryce> bbl. ciao!

16:51:54 <dajobe> maybe that'll be for XXL

16:51:55 <danbri> Oh he got that pic? cool :)

16:51:59 <danbri> XMLporn :)

16:52:13 <dajobe> there's a super huge one http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/13/-big/XMLporn.jpg

16:52:18 <dajobe> darn it

16:52:19 <dajobe>http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/13/MegaXML

16:52:20 <dc_rdfig> K: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/13/MegaXML from dajobe

16:52:22 <dajobe> K:|Mega XML

16:52:23 <dc_rdfig> Titled item K.

16:52:29 <dajobe> K:+[http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/12/13/XMLporn.png]

16:52:30 <dc_rdfig> Added comment K1.

16:52:31 <ndw> You can put any of the snaps that you like into the codepiction archives, libby

16:52:44 <libby> thanks ndw :)

16:52:47 <ndw> Bob (Ducharme) and I have set ourselves a project to be codepicted in a mirror next year :-)

16:52:50 <dajobe> K:by Tim Bray *... even thinking about that many namespaces gives me a headache.*

16:52:50 <dc_rdfig> Added comment K2.

16:52:55 <libby> cool :)

16:53:08 <libby> I've put it in as a depiction of you. bauble not in wn though

16:53:29 <ndw> I looked for bauble in wn too. None of the definitions of ornament even seemed right.

16:54:03 <ndw> kota: But luckily norm doesn't have to think about that many namespaces as the great big pile is an artifact of aggregation. The important data is all in quite managable pieces.

16:54:24 <ndw> K:But luckily norm doesn't have to think about that many namespaces as the great big pile is an artifact of aggregation. The important data is all in quite managable pieces.

16:54:24 <dc_rdfig> Added comment K3.

16:54:36 <ndw> Sorry kota. X-Chat acting weird.

16:55:24 <kota> that's fine :)

16:55:36 <libby> I put it in as decoration, but not really right either

16:56:00 <libby> my xchat just stopped working, I missed greg leaving...

16:56:22 <ndw> i gave up and just left it un wn:'d

16:58:35 <ndw> bbiab

16:59:34 * DanC seems to be missing lots of ImageDescription fun

17:03:34 * danbri adds bray's image to http://esw.w3.org/topic/VocabularyMarket as an illustration (clumsily dumped at end of doc, not sure if we can do css/right align / flow stuff in wiki)

17:04:01 <libby> there's another one danc, probbaly 6th jan

17:04:03 <mmealling> ok, check it out again: http://cafeshops.com/rocketforge.9047840?zoom=yes I know its not my image and I don't have rights to the presentation so I'll take it down. I just thought it was kind of cool....

17:04:25 <dajobe> oh god

17:04:35 <libby> we didn't really talk about interesting technical stuff anyway today - mostly admin stuff

17:04:58 <libby> heh, neat mmealling

17:05:04 * danbri suggests "xml:Porn"

17:06:07 <swh_afk> swh_afk is now known as swh

17:07:21 <DanC> hmm... speaking of VocabularyMarket, esp musicbrainz... I just got a CD that a friend of mine cut.

17:07:32 <DanC> I want to mail him a "thanks for the CD"...

17:08:00 <DanC> ... but of course I want to be very clear which CD I'm talking about by attaching a cddb-style description of it. better yet in RDF...

17:08:06 <DanC> ... will zinf let me make one?

17:09:44 <mmealling> danbri, done.....

17:12:54 <DanC> zinf indeed looks up the cd in musicbrainz, doesn't find it, offers to have me describe it...

17:17:54 <libby>http://www.mapbureau.com/pointmapper/

17:17:54 <dc_rdfig> L: http://www.mapbureau.com/pointmapper/ from libby

17:18:13 <libby> L:|PointMapper

17:18:13 <dc_rdfig> Titled item L.

17:18:54 <libby> L:Chris Goad sent me this, thinking it might be useful for the image WWW2004 conf project

17:18:54 <dc_rdfig> Added comment L1.

17:19:39 <libby> L:it's a client -side scripting API for locating poinbts on a map. There's a very cute example at the bottom of that page.

17:19:39 <dc_rdfig> Added comment L2.

17:20:13 <libby> L:uses javascript and flash

17:20:14 <dc_rdfig> Added comment L3.

17:24:30 <DanC> er... ok, now this album is in musicbrainz... how do I get the RDF version?

17:24:37 <libby> L:"PointMapper, like our other products, is free for non-commercial use. The fee for commercial use is $400/year per server"

17:24:37 <dc_rdfig> Added comment L4.

17:25:05 <DanC> . http://www.musicbrainz.org/showalbum.html?albumid=170974

17:25:52 <danbri> view info -> mm/rdf

17:26:54 <DanC> cool...

17:26:56 <DanC> <http://musicbrainz.org/album/3eda2264-a2eb-408a-b65b-c74aeddf2b80> a :Album;

17:29:47 <DanC> hmm... how do I get the list of tracks in RDF?

17:31:02 <danbri> logger, pointer?

17:31:02 <danbri> See http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2003-12-19#T17-31-02

17:32:34 <DanC> hmm... it seems to be in ~/.zinf/db/mbcd

17:34:04 * danbri asks in #musicbrainz, but all quiet so far

17:34:38 <DanC> <http://www.musicbrainz.org/track/0e59c8a5-fe8f-4528-93fe-3689aaa1b683>

17:34:38 <DanC> a :Track;

17:34:38 <DanC> :duration "300666";

17:34:38 <DanC> dc:creator <http://www.musicbrainz.org/artist/9e07129d-e3d2-45fc-b676-c5d6b7f16207>;

17:34:38 <DanC> dc:title "Metaphysical" .

17:34:50 <danbri> they use n3, or you're translating?

17:35:04 <DanC> I'm translating

17:35:13 <DanC> quick RDF "lint"

17:43:26 <danbri> foaf-a-matic v2 does MB lookups, http://www.ldodds.com/blog/archives/000087.html

17:44:57 <LotR> now to make it human-readable :)

17:49:49 <danbri>http://chatlogs.musicbrainz.org/2003/2003-12/2003-12-19.html

17:49:49 <dc_rdfig> M: http://chatlogs.musicbrainz.org/2003/2003-12/2003-12-19.html from danbri

17:50:00 <danbri> M:|Today's MusicBrainz IRC chat logs

17:50:00 <dc_rdfig> Titled item M.

17:50:25 <danbri> M:With discussion of DanC's [http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/chatlogs/rdfig/2003-12-19#T17-31-02|question] about MB album metadata lookups.

17:50:26 <dc_rdfig> Added comment M1.

18:44:06 <danbri>http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/wiki.pl?SurvivalOfTheFittest

18:44:06 <dc_rdfig> N: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/wiki.pl?SurvivalOfTheFittest from danbri

18:44:12 <danbri> N:|SurvivalOfTheFittest

18:44:12 <dc_rdfig> Titled item N.

18:44:37 <danbri> N:From musicbrainz wiki, notes on voting, moderation etc of music metadata

18:44:37 <dc_rdfig> Added comment N1.

18:50:08 <sandro_> N: very nice.

18:50:08 <dc_rdfig> Added comment N2.

18:50:16 <sandro_> sandro_ is now known as sandro

18:54:20 * mortenf seems to have missed another image chat - and some communication leading up to it?

18:55:27 <danbri> was surfacing of an offlist collaboration about www2004 stuff, rather than a classic rdfig scheduled topic chat thing

18:55:43 <danbri> fair amount discussion re moving to more open / visible communication, which was good.

18:55:58 <mortenf> yeah, kind of figured, just curious re "the document" mentioned - yep

18:56:15 <danbri> I think it'll surface in wiki soonish

18:59:20 <libby> yeah sorry mortenf

18:59:30 <mortenf> heh, no prob

18:59:36 <libby> not done much tech stuff yet anyway

19:00:10 <mortenf> looking forward to it all

19:05:24 <libby> yeah should be fun

19:05:39 <libby> hopefully will get some good 'how to' documentation out iof it

19:11:41 <mortenf> yep, that'd be good

19:11:59 <mortenf> anyway, off to beer and music...

20:59:26 <mdupont> mdupont is now known as md-nap

21:29:50 <eaon> eaon is now known as eaon|bughunt

21:37:21 <Netmonger> Netmonger is now known as Netminder

21:51:27 <dinoff> dinoff is now known as dino

22:21:07 <dino> dino is now known as dinoff

22:30:34 <deusx> deusx is now known as _deusx

23:09:41 <bryce>http://www.zeldman.com/daily/1203i.shtml#semantic

23:09:41 <dc_rdfig> O: http://www.zeldman.com/daily/1203i.shtml#semantic from bryce

23:09:52 <bryce> Zeldman criticizes the First European Semantic Web Symposium (non semantic) website.

23:10:21 <bryce> ^'s

23:18:02 <adr> That site is a semantic nightmare

23:18:28 <adr> I don't think there is actually any *text* on the thing

23:18:41 <bryce> there isn't

23:18:47 <bryce> *none*

23:18:49 <bryce> !

23:19:20 <adr> I wonder if someone will bring it up at the conference itself

23:19:27 <dajobe> we said all this last week

23:19:36 <dajobe> it's a presentation web site, not a semantic one

23:19:44 <bryce> oh

23:19:48 <dajobe> O:|Zeldman criticizes the First European Semantic Web Symposium (non semantic) website.

23:19:48 <dc_rdfig> Titled item O.

23:21:20 <aharth> i am working with on of the students who help organize this thing to put some RDF there with information about the conference

23:21:49 <dajobe> O:we noticed this [http://rdfig.xmlhack.com/2003/12/09/2003-12-09.html#1071001048.476126|2003-12-09]

23:21:49 <dc_rdfig> Added comment O1.

23:22:28 <dajobe> O:pathetic, inacessible, bad. It looks pretty and that's it.

23:22:28 <dc_rdfig> Added comment O2.

23:23:04 <dajobe> O:strike that. The fonts are a mess too.

23:23:04 <dc_rdfig> Added comment O3.

23:23:39 <dajobe> O2:pathetic, inaccessible, bad. It looks pretty and that's it.

23:23:39 <dc_rdfig> Replaced comment O2.

23:25:19 <bryce> well, as they say: Any publicity is good publicity. So even if the naysayers have a laugh, the concept of the semantic web is nevertheless in the news. A lot of bloggers read Zeldman and DiveintoMark.

23:25:34 <adr> True

23:25:36 <dajobe> and as we know, quantity=good

23:25:56 <bryce> always

23:26:01 <adr> Although at this point the semantic web is still a pipe-dream

23:26:01 <dajobe> now try googling for semantic web and see a shirky of cluefreedom

23:26:09 <dajobe> lol

23:26:15 <dajobe> My running code says otherwise.

23:26:26 <bryce> ;)

23:26:32 <adr> What's that?

23:27:31 <dajobe> .google redland rdf

23:27:31 <datum> redland rdf: http://www.redland.opensource.ac.uk/

23:28:04 <dajobe> no FUD can make existing stuff like sesame, jena, mine, suddenly not work

23:28:36 <dajobe> try owl.mindswap.org for some more advanced stuff

23:29:22 <adr> Just because the facilites exists doesn't mean people use them or know they exist. That's the major hurdle as far as I'm concerned

23:29:52 <dajobe> so you've not heard of FOAF

23:30:01 <adr> I know people who are on the web eight hours a day and have never heard of Linux

23:30:03 <dajobe> where end users are making a semantic web of files

23:30:09 <adr> I have. I have my own FOAF

23:30:11 <dajobe> and there are tens of thousands of them

23:30:33 <dajobe> you are asking for the unanswerable

23:30:39 <dajobe> tell me, when is the web complete?

23:30:51 <bryce> dajobe: i see your point, but it's a matter of perspective and scope. blunders can bring about renewed vigor to do well.

23:30:56 <adr> Ha, I think you're twisting the point.

23:31:26 <dajobe> you said "the semantic web is still a pipe dream"

23:31:29 <adr> At this time the semantic web is a dream. A good one and an acheivable one, but still a dream.

23:31:29 <dajobe> I say, it runs now.

23:31:54 <dajobe> now, just because all of the ideas aren't yet available, doesn't mean the web of connected terms isn't there now

23:32:26 <adr> To me "semantic web" means when the web is semantic. Ten thousand FOAF documents mean nothing compared to billions upon billions of documents of tag soup markup.

23:32:42 <bryce> it's just a relatively small web.

23:32:44 <dajobe> and trillions of database files that aren't on the web

23:32:50 <dajobe> they are yet to be webified

23:32:55 <dajobe> so the web is not yet done either

23:33:02 <bryce> +1 dajobe

23:33:17 <adr> And like I said, just because the facility exists doesn't mean it is used enough to be useful to the common person.

23:33:18 <dajobe> (not to mention the things written on paper)

23:33:32 <dajobe> well, if you'd said that

23:33:37 <dajobe> you said "the semantic web is still a pipe dream"

23:33:48 <dajobe> not, " used enough to be useful to the common person."

23:33:53 <bryce> dad? what's paper? ;)

23:33:54 <adr> The ideal of the semantic web si a pipe-dream

23:34:05 <dajobe> ah, recursion

23:34:18 <dajobe> well, if you go for an ideal, you can implement the pracitcal

23:34:23 <adr> Recursion? No, clarity for a misunderstood statement

23:34:40 <dajobe> and the practical rdf, owl, semantic web parts are starting to work

23:35:13 <adr> I have read articles by Tim Berners-Lee about what he envisions a semantic web to be able to do and what it will be like. That is a dream at this point.

23:36:05 <dajobe> and I've seen the ideas in that article (sci am) demonstrated in code

23:36:21 <adr> Calling the semantic web a reality as it is, is like comparing me connecting my network to my neighbours to the Internet.

23:36:25 <dajobe> maybe you forget how to build the web

23:36:28 <dajobe> network effects

23:36:46 <dajobe> start from the core technologies, write gateways, build compleing cases

23:36:57 <dajobe> then move into the intersting stuff

23:37:03 <dajobe> and that's where we are now

23:37:54 <bryce> cheers to visionaries and road builders!

23:38:32 <adr> I maintain my opinion that at this point in time the semantic web is a pipe-dream. Does it work? Sure. Is it a good idea? Definately. Is it useful to anyone other than arm-chair markup geeks? No.

23:38:39 <dajobe> but I must go now and have weekend fun. ciao all

23:38:46 <adr> Goodbye

23:39:48 <bryce> i see your point, but "Rome wasn't built in a day."

23:40:37 <adr> True, I enjoy watching resources grow and useage as well, but reality must be acknowledged

23:41:48 <bryce> but when we arrive, there will be newer destinations. at that point, even what we already have will seem lame.

23:42:58 <adr> Yeah, I think the idea will catch on faster than the WWW though since it is built on top of a growing trend

23:43:12 <adr> Or rather redefines a growing trend

23:44:03 <bryce> possibly, but not necessarily. maybe 2 revolutions are too much for 1 generation.

23:44:33 <bryce> maybe everyone will just get lazy,

23:45:05 * bryce is an optimist, though.

23:47:37 <bryce> i wonder if there are really tens of thousands of foaf files. maybe tens of hundreds?

23:49:51 <bryce> bryce is now known as bryce_

23:50:00 <adr> I think there are quite a few

23:50:31 <adr> I know mine personally isn't connected to anyone else's yet and I'm sure there are others like mine

23:55:45 <bryce_> right. all my friend's think Foaf is a character in a Tolkien story.

23:55:57 <adr> haha

23:56:27 <adr> Foaf sounds like some kind of store bought fruit loaf to me

23:56:54 <bryce_> he he

23:57:26 <bryce_> to me it sounds like something you'd leave in a toilet.

23:57:44 * bryce_ needs to pinch a foaf.

23:58:32 <adr> I wish FOAF were a little more consistant and sensible about some things though

23:58:48 <bryce_> ?

23:59:41 <adr> for example: <surname/>, <family_name/>, <firstName/> etc